Gregory Alan Elliott, 53, is on trial for criminally harassing feminist Stephanie Guthrie and 2 other women; repeatedly calling them out on Twitter after they had blocked him and making a show of knowing their whereabouts and doings on the platform. The verdict will be reached in January 2016, and hinges upon whether the women had a reasonable fear for their safety after Elliot began to take note of their physical whereabouts and broadcast them on Twitter.
To grease the wheels of justice, Elliott’s called upon other would-be internet stalkers to empty their pockets. They’ve responded in grand form, giving Elliott more than $40,000 via Generosity.com (an affiliate of IndieGoGo.)
Elliott and his sons are quick to note the impact the proceedings have had on him — he has been barred from using the internet while the trial is in progress, which cost him his job as a graphic designer. But someone has been putting together cutesy websites to defend him, and promoting his fundraiser with the hashtag #freedomoftweets, and alerting sympathetic “journalists” like Milo Yiannopoulos of Elliott’s legal plight.
Let’s be clear about what’s going on here. Elliott wasn’t just exercising his freedom of expression; he was repeatedly sending unwanted and insulting communications with the intent of making this targets afraid. He did this to multiple people, over a period of months. He knew they didn’t want to hear from him, yet he persisted.
One accuser was stalked after deciding not to hire Mr. Elliott for a logo-and-poster job, and another claimed Mr. Elliott combed the hashtag #TOpoli (short for Toronto politics) just to find Tweets written by her after she blocked him. In the case of this second accuser, Mr. Elliott made a show of knowing her whereabouts, causing her to fear he would follow her in public places. Elliott continued this behavior even after the court issued a peace bond (i.e. an injunction) for him to stop Tweeting at these people; it was his failure to follow this court order that led to his brief incarceration and current predicament.
This kind of behavior would unquestionably be regarded as criminal harassment if Elliott had been making unwanted, harassing phone calls; the same behavior is criminal harassment if it’s done via Twitter. However, there are those in the press downplaying what happened or portraying the accusers as “shrill” feminist bitches; and the women accusing Mr. Elliott have been instructed by the court not to defend themselves by discussing the case online.
But clearly, people are willing to defend Mr. Elliott — on his website, on his IndieGoGo, in the National Post, on Breitbart.com. Elliott clearly has the support of a massive group of people— let’s call it the Internet Hate Machine — who have already emptied their pockets and talked themselves blue in the face supporting this guy and tearing down his accusers. Yet Guthrie et al. seem to have no recourse, nor support on the order of what Mr. Elliott has collected.
It’s my hope this guy will have the book thrown at him, if only to dissuade the next would-be stalker on Twitter. But it’s plain as day that the conversation about online harassment must go beyond the perpetrators and consider those who promote online abuse as well. The Blatchfords and Yiannopouloses out there who defend guys like Elliott and drive traffic to his fundraiser make his attempts at stalking more successful, and minimize the consequences of doing it. What’s to be done about them?
Edit: Added a few sentences about Elliott’s peace bond, whether this is really a “free speech issue”.
Update 11/25/15: Elliott’s fundraiser has now hit $50k in donations.